Hubspot reports that Facebook penalizes posts from third-party tools: “content published through third-party API tools suffered 67% fewer likes than content published manually via Facebook.com.”
Also, “content published through third-party API tools suffered 60% fewer clicks than content published manually via Facebook.com.”
Based on this, and the fact that some big brands are doing well with the Facebook Timeline, Hubspot concludes that “Timeline is good for big business, bad for small.” Why? Because big brands are more likely to use actual Facebook Pages instead of third-party APIs. But the post offers no evidence on this.
I love Hubspot’s blog and usually agree with their opinions, but this time I’m calling bullshit. Or at least adding some qualifiers.
Okay, big brands can afford people dedicated to social media, and maybe even a person or two with nothing else to do but post on Facebook. So they do without third-party tools, or at least can easily switch to using Facebook instead.
Mid-sized brands and marketing agencies probably use tools, because they are both short of resources and savvy enough to be aware of tools and know how to use them.
The smallest businesses, the ones owned/run by one or two business-owners and maybe a couple of employees? I’d bet they are more likely to use Facebook directly.
Here are some posts by small businesses on their brand pages.
These are the only small business pages I looked at (these were what came first to mind when I thought of small businesses), andnoneof them show any evidence of third-party tools. (If you post using a third-party tool, Facebook will name the tool with your post, e.g., “via Hubspot.”) Of course it’s purely anecdotal evidence, but it supports my intuitive reaction.
What about you? Do you use Facebook or a third-party tool to post content?